The market is terrible at providing sufficient and adequate services without governmental regulation
Zero evidence for this, and all they do is provide “sufficient” (nope) and “adequate” (by 1995 standards) service WITH the regulation.
If the only option is continued government control (it isn’t), I’m fine with taking it down to the city level. Then again, cities shouldn’t have to care about this at all. Leave it to the businesses that, you know, actually know what they’re doing.
Part of the problem is that the only way to get different
services is to have multiple set-top boxes, and that creates a barrier for many
folks to wean themselves off cable. And until that happens in larger numbers
there is little motivation for the cable and content providers to break up
their bundles and offer more flexible choices of channel lineups. But first
there needs to be a set-to box that bridges the old and new media.
Imagine if the original iTunes and iPod was only capable of
working with music purchased from the iTunes Music Store. No easy way to rip
your existing CD collection and add it to your library. CDs would probably still
be the dominant form of music sales today. But by bridging the old and new,
iTunes provided a migration path for users from CDs to digital download.
TiVo can function as this bridge for video content since it
can deliver both cable (via CableCard) and online content from Netflix, Amazon,
Hulu, Plex, etc (all the major players except Apple). The universal search will
even find content on both cable, including VOD, and online providers. The
barrier with TiVo is the subscription fee which TiVo needs since they don’t
have revenue from selling/renting content. It’s less than renting a DVR from
Comcast, but you have to be willing to make a long-term commitment. It look
just under 3 years for my TiVo to pay for itself in saved DVR rental fees ( vs
7 months for my purchased cable modem to pay for itself in saved modem rental
fees).
Not that I’m suggesting Apple should have done this, but if
the earlier versions of AppleTV had had CableCard support, Apple could have
applied their UI expertise to making a better cable box. That probably would
have led to higher AppleTV adoption with a Trojan horse of access to iTunes
content. Embrace the legacy format (CDs, cable) while enabling the discovery of
the new format (online). Instead Apple went straight for online-only so they
could make money off iTunes sales. All the while services like Amazon and
Netflix got baked into every TV and blu-ray player sold.
Until someone can make a unifying set-top box, and be more
successful at it than TiVo has been, or there are apps on existing set-top
boxes that can deliver content that only cable can deliver today (live, local,
etc), breaking the cable stranglehold is going to be tough.
The government needs to stop meddling in corporation's affairs. They think they know what's best, but really they're just picking winners and losers. Let the market and consumers decide whom the winners and losers are, not government and lobbyists.
The problem is, corporation's interest is profit. Consumers don't share that interest. It's been years and the big corporations are keeping smaller companies shut, because there's basic duopoly. Verizon and Comcast. Free market and consumers can't break this. The only way is for basic rules to be enforced for the benefit of both parties.
That's one of the most inane comments I've ever read.
How so? There are jurisdictions today that are served by multiple cable providers. In jurisdictions served by providers such as AT&T U-verse and Verizon Fios TV, there is usually at least one other cable provider. Despite having multiple providers, each operating over their own cabling, I have neither seen nor heard of any particular problems. Let us not forget that Direct TV and the Dish Network freely compete with each other and with the cable providers with not ill effects.
So, to put is another way: "Wut chu talkin' 'bout, Willis?"
You're never going to get more than 2 cable providers, and it's going to be the incumbent cable company plus either AT&T, or Verizon. Verizon has already halted expanding FiOS into any area it didn't already have an agreement with. The cost is just too great.
And how about the second paragraph in which he wants more sewage, and water companies. That's just not possible.
Comments
If the only option is continued government control (it isn’t), I’m fine with taking it down to the city level. Then again, cities shouldn’t have to care about this at all. Leave it to the businesses that, you know, actually know what they’re doing.
Part of the problem is that the only way to get different services is to have multiple set-top boxes, and that creates a barrier for many folks to wean themselves off cable. And until that happens in larger numbers there is little motivation for the cable and content providers to break up their bundles and offer more flexible choices of channel lineups. But first there needs to be a set-to box that bridges the old and new media.
Imagine if the original iTunes and iPod was only capable of working with music purchased from the iTunes Music Store. No easy way to rip your existing CD collection and add it to your library. CDs would probably still be the dominant form of music sales today. But by bridging the old and new, iTunes provided a migration path for users from CDs to digital download.
TiVo can function as this bridge for video content since it can deliver both cable (via CableCard) and online content from Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, Plex, etc (all the major players except Apple). The universal search will even find content on both cable, including VOD, and online providers. The barrier with TiVo is the subscription fee which TiVo needs since they don’t have revenue from selling/renting content. It’s less than renting a DVR from Comcast, but you have to be willing to make a long-term commitment. It look just under 3 years for my TiVo to pay for itself in saved DVR rental fees ( vs 7 months for my purchased cable modem to pay for itself in saved modem rental fees).
Not that I’m suggesting Apple should have done this, but if the earlier versions of AppleTV had had CableCard support, Apple could have applied their UI expertise to making a better cable box. That probably would have led to higher AppleTV adoption with a Trojan horse of access to iTunes content. Embrace the legacy format (CDs, cable) while enabling the discovery of the new format (online). Instead Apple went straight for online-only so they could make money off iTunes sales. All the while services like Amazon and Netflix got baked into every TV and blu-ray player sold.
Until someone can make a unifying set-top box, and be more successful at it than TiVo has been, or there are apps on existing set-top boxes that can deliver content that only cable can deliver today (live, local, etc), breaking the cable stranglehold is going to be tough.
And how about the second paragraph in which he wants more sewage, and water companies. That's just not possible.